2008
DOI: 10.1130/b26073.1
|Get access via publisher |Summarize |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts

Synoptic reconstruction of a major ancient lake system: Eocene Green River Formation, western United States

Abstract: Numerous 40 Ar/ 39 Ar experiments on sanidine and biotite from 22 ash beds and 3 volcaniclastic sand beds from the Greater Green River, Piceance Creek, and UintaBasins of Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah constrain ~8 m.y. of the Eocene Epoch. Multiple analyses were conducted per sample using laser fusion and incremental heating techniques to differentiate inheritance, 40 Ar loss, and 39 Ar recoil. When considered in conjunction with existing radioisotopic ages and lithostratigraphy, biostratigraphy, and magnetostra… Show more

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
298
37
26
16

Citation Types

8
316
1
1

Year Published

Range
2007
2007
2026
2026

Publication Types

Select...
280
31
14
11

Relationship

4
332

Authors

Journals

citations

Cited by 334 publications

(326 citation statements)
references

References 165 publications

8
316
1
1
Order By: Relevance
How this paper cites the one you are viewing
“…Of the two dated samples in this study, the date of sample PCM3Aug14-04 from the tuffaceous white sandstone bed is in close agreement with the U-Pb date of the Sage Creek Mountain tuff by Tsukui (2016), and the two ages overlap within analytical error. These two U-Pb dates are also in agreement with the 40 Ar/ 39 Ar date of Smith et al (2008Smith et al ( , 2010 for the Sage Creek Mountain tuff when the astronomically calibrated age of the Fish Canyon sanidine is used, although the 40 Ar/ 39 Ar date is comparatively older. Based on the age as well as the description of the bed from which the sample was collected, it is likely that the Sage Creek Mountain tuff of Smith et al (2008Smith et al ( , 2010 and Tsukui (2016) is the same bed as the bed from which PCM3Aug14-04 was collected.…”
Section: Remarks
supporting
confidence: 86%
“…These two U-Pb dates are also in agreement with the 40 Ar/ 39 Ar date of Smith et al (2008Smith et al ( , 2010 for the Sage Creek Mountain tuff when the astronomically calibrated age of the Fish Canyon sanidine is used, although the 40 Ar/ 39 Ar date is comparatively older. Based on the age as well as the description of the bed from which the sample was collected, it is likely that the Sage Creek Mountain tuff of Smith et al (2008Smith et al ( , 2010 and Tsukui (2016) is the same bed as the bed from which PCM3Aug14-04 was collected. The best age estimate for the Ui1a fauna in the TBM is thus provided by the radioisotopic (U-Pb and 40 Ar/ 39 Ar) dates from the level of Locality SDSNH 5844 (Roll the Bones) as well as the stratigraphically lower tuffaceous white sandstone bed and the apparently laterally equivalent Sage Creek Mountain tuff.…”
Section: Remarks
supporting
confidence: 86%
“…The new radioisotopic data provide important constraints for the age of the TBM as well as its Ui1a fauna. The new U-Pb dates are generally consistent with the U-Pb and 40 Ar/ 39 Ar ages of ash beds from the Bridger Formation in Smith et al (2008Smith et al ( , 2010 and Tsukui (2016). Of the two dated samples in this study, the date of sample PCM3Aug14-04 from the tuffaceous white sandstone bed is in close agreement with the U-Pb date of the Sage Creek Mountain tuff by Tsukui (2016), and the two ages overlap within analytical error.…”
Section: Remarks
supporting
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations